Zinaida Serebryakova 2018

Editor: Here we have *Zinaida Serebryakova*, an oil painting made in 2018 by Andrey Allakhverdov. The portrait shows the artist holding a brush and palette, and it seems she's depicting herself painting. How would you interpret this work? Curator: The painting seems preoccupied with revealing the means of its own production. Oil paint is itself foregrounded, demanding that we think about the cost of materials, the labor of painting, and the economy of the art world, no? This 'academic art' and the realism style also emphasizes particular historical training and available materials, placing the production process in a broader context of class and labour division. Editor: That’s interesting. So, seeing it that way, what does it tell us about the artist and the circumstances around the art's creation? Curator: Well, look closely at what she represents as her art materials. Palette, canvas, paint… All items available via particular networks. Further, look at the easel itself, likely mass-produced versus made in-house. What decisions are suggested when the painter adopts or casts away custom design? I am not necessarily suggesting the choices here speak directly to particular political leanings but more so on the location of the artist within a social milieu. Do you see that, too? Editor: I never considered the easel. All these details related to art production give an important framework, moving beyond just considering artistic skill! Curator: Precisely. We also mustn't neglect the relationship between "high art" and craft signaled here. The portraits' visual impact is inextricably linked to the artist’s mastery and conscious utilization of the mediums and the tools. Seeing the artistic journey, production and social factors opens other exciting dialogues around art. Editor: Thank you! Considering materiality in art offers new questions. It changes how I appreciate such works.